Yes, I think that this may be considered the central problem.
It's easier to compare two different scenarios with a standard measure and
to use kilos to compare apples and oranges, for instance.
The problem is to understand that oranges will continue to be oranges after
this measure, and apples will continue to be apples.
This is an example to say that several countries focus their contest in
quality, some others in quantity.
The prize and the contest, anyway, is focused to select the "better photo"
and not the biggest uploaders.
It means that there is no sense to force the quantitative parameters while
the incentives are focused to increase quality.
Personally I find the same measure costs/uploads a lot far from the most
correct measure costs/benefits because we cannot consider a single upload
automatically as a "benefit".
In my opinion the most critical point is how measure costs (the workload of
a community is it a cost?) and the benefits (a huge amount of worst photos
is it a benefit?) because it involves several not measurable parameters.
Regards
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Samuel Klein <meta.sj(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Figuring out what ideas are repeatable, scalable, or awesome but one-time
only, is complex. We probably need many different approaches, not one
central approach, to understand and compare.
--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Wikipedia: Ilario <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario>
Skype: valdelli
Facebook: Ilario Valdelli <https://www.facebook.com/ivaldelli>
Twitter: Ilario Valdelli <https://twitter.com/ilariovaldelli>
Linkedin: Ilario Valdelli <http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6724469>
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch